Thomas Shey
Legend
So illusionism is the price we pay for GM agency???
Only for the definition of GM agency that requires them to control everything about the setting and everything about the mechanics too.
So illusionism is the price we pay for GM agency???
Based on actual experience with actual players, I am going to guess "nearly none." A significant portion of players come to the table to be entertained as if if they were going to a movie. And that's fine. But I think it is silly to suggest that for some secret hidden majority of players there's this quashed desire to really WORK at the table.
That is a different kind of game. As you say, such games exist, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about. If you want to run your campaign this way, you are welcome to do so. Sounds like fun.I’ll put this here for evidence of what I’m talking about. Ray Winneger (sp) in Dungeon Magazine, back when it was a print magazine, had a fantastic series about campaign design. Really the gold standard for campaign design. Fantastic stuff. Went on for quite a few years as I recall.
I don’t recall a single article talking about engaging the players in campaign design. Everything comes from the dm.
I’ve got a cool little game that I picked up where the players collaboratively/competitively design a game world. Each player is a god and can do all sorts of things that you would expect gods to do - create lands, peoples, send disasters you name it. At the end of play, you have a complete world with geography, history etc.
Six DND DMG‘s and not a single one even whispers a suggestion of creating a campaign this way. It’s always 100% from the DM to the players who passively lap up whatever the DM is serving.
Even Adventure Paths are designed this way. Why not have collaborative dungeon design where each player builds a part of the dungeon, which the dm then stitched together. As the dm makes changes, the players are awarded a pool of bonus dice to use while exploring the dungeon. Great idea. Takes so much work load off the dm and engages the players to a huge degree.
Not so much as a hint of doing something like that in trad games.
Mod Note:In other words, a radical individualist who doesn't care what other people think? Well, at least that explains why you're not able to engage with people who feel otherwise.
For what it's worth, 4e D&D flagged this possibility in its PHB, in its DMG (both in the context of player-authored quests) and then said more, including outside the quest context, in the DMG 2.Six DND DMG‘s and not a single one even whispers a suggestion of creating a campaign this way.
I've seen GMs who think its an unwarranted intrusion to define the village your character came from.
I’ve got a cool little game that I picked up where the players collaboratively/competitively design a game world.
<snip>
Six DND DMG‘s and not a single one even whispers a suggestion of creating a campaign this way.
I don't think it's terribly different at all.That is a different kind of game.
This I think is more radical, as it is not just player authorship of background setting elements but players authoring the core obstacles of the adventure.Why not have collaborative dungeon design where each player builds a part of the dungeon, which the dm then stitched together. As the dm makes changes, the players are awarded a pool of bonus dice to use while exploring the dungeon. Great idea. Takes so much work load off the dm and engages the players to a huge degree.
This is not my experience.The whole “roll up the plot wagon and entertain me” crowd of gamers is imo very much a learned behaviour.
Often.But is this even a thing?
Is there a game out there that has rules like "once the DM has made a person, place or thing it shall never be changed ever" ? Or even more "the DM shall never make up anything the players do not like"?
And the DM does not even need to "change" things....just "decide what happens". Like the characters attack an evil wizard....but fall for the trap and fail their saves. Leaving the characters trapped in magical poisonous mud and covered in magic webs. Well, the evil wizard npc can end it right there...a single attack and TPK dead characters. But the DM does not want to do that so "suddenly" has the wizard cast Sprinkle of Cold Snowflakes for 1d2 damage.